First impressions X-Pro 2

T

TerryMcC

Established
Local time
9:06 PM
Joined
Apr 8, 2017
Messages
59
Received my new to me camera today. Accidentally bought it via eBay, late one night instead of selecting the watch option I selected bid. Put in what I thought was a low bid and ended up getting it. Hmmm. Glad I did. Have just unboxed it and played with it indoors without using manual. Have found it reasonably intuitive to use, love the viewfinder. So far it is as enjoyable to look through as my Nikon RF cameras with the bonus of really clear frame lines. More playing to come as I learn its ins and outs.
 
I love mine also. I customized 5 or 6 film presets and turned it into my jpg machine. I've not had a single issue with the exception of sensor dust once in a while, but that's user error rather than the cameras fault
 
Not every unintended consequence is bad!

I happen to adore my X-Pro 2. I can operate it as I used my Zeiss Ikon M rangefinder.

Since you are new to the X-Pro 2, I will mention it performs differently below ISO 800 than it does above ISO 640.

Below ISO 640 the sensor's photo-diode electronics are optimized to increase dynamic range at the expense of sensitivity. At ISO 800 and above the sensor photo-diode electronics are optimized to increase sensitivity at the expense of dynamic range.

This is called dual conversion-gain which recently became commercialized on newer SONY, FUJIFILM and Nikon bodies.

The primary benefit can be observed in the perceived image quality (signal-to-noise ratio) of shadow regions.

With high DR scenes the shutter and aperture can be set to maximize exposure for the brightest regions. This in turn increases the S/N for the darker regions. Since the light levels are high by definition, the reduction in overall sensitivity has practically no impact on perceived image quality.

In low light the dynamic range of the scene is not an issue. So, the overall sensitivity is increased. The S/N increase is most obvious in darker regions, but all regions benefit.
 
If you are using ACROS (in camera, not the LR profile) you should try shooting at higher ISO, even when not needed. (Try around 2000) The JPEG engines works somewhat differently when using ACROS as it alters the NR to try and replace with grain instead of removing the noise. This is different from the Grain feature that can be applied on top of any JPEG images.

http://fujifilm-x.com/gbl/x-stories/the-newest-film-simulation-acros/

If you want a gritty type pushed TriX go really high... around 10000 or so.

Shawn
 
Congrats Terry, on your being "all-thumbs" on ebay. I did something like that when the Nikon D300 came out. I begged them to cancel my order and they did! With X Pro 2 I'd have for sure gone ahead with it.

It seems like this camera deserves a Post your X Pro 2 images thread. I will start one and see if it takes off. The camera even after a couple of years and a very flooded market of camera bodies, seems to continually attract new photographers.

David
 
willie_901 said:
Not every unintended consequence is bad!

I happen to adore my X-Pro 2. I can operate it as I used my Zeiss Ikon M rangefinder.

Since you are new to the X-Pro 2, I will mention it performs differently below ISO 800 than it does above ISO 640.

Below ISO 640 the sensor's photo-diode electronics are optimized to increase dynamic range at the expense of sensitivity. At ISO 800 and above the sensor photo-diode electronics are optimized to increase sensitivity at the expense of dynamic range.

This is called dual conversion-gain which recently became commercialized on newer SONY, FUJIFILM and Nikon bodies.

The primary benefit can be observed in the perceived image quality (signal-to-noise ratio) of shadow regions.

With high DR scenes the shutter and aperture can be set to maximize exposure for the brightest regions. This in turn increases the S/N for the darker regions. Since the light levels are high by definition, the reduction in overall sensitivity has practically no impact on perceived image quality.

In low light the dynamic range of the scene is not an issue. So, the overall sensitivity is increased. The S/N increase is most obvious in darker regions, but all regions benefit.
Click to expand...

Thanks for this. I'm a recent convert to Fuji mirrorless. I was set to get an XPro-2 but the $500 discount on the XT-2 was too much to resist. So far, I'm really enjoying it with the 23/35/50 Fujicrons and am looking forward to trying it out with my recently acquired 16/1.4.
 
kxl said:
Thanks for this. I'm a recent convert to Fuji mirrorless. I was set to get an XPro-2 but the $500 discount on the XT-2 was too much to resist. So far, I'm really enjoying it with the 23/35/50 Fujicrons and am looking forward to trying it out with my recently acquired 16/1.4.
Click to expand...

+1 is very useful and Shawn's re Acros as well!
 
Here's some data showing the affects of dual-conversion gain.

These plots compare the X-T1 or X-T10 with the X-Pro 2.

Total noise in unrendered raw data versus ISO
This shows the total system noise (sensor, ISO gain and ADC) as a function of ISO.

Input referred read noise versus ISO.
This shows the just the sensor noise level as a function of ISO.

The decrease in noise above ISO 640 does not mean we should always use ISO 800.

Since there is no signal, these data are only half the story.

Perceived image quality depends on the signal-to-nose ratio. The signal level is determined by the shutter time and aperture (i.e. the exposure). When we choose shutter time and aperture based on the meter, the sensor is underexposed at ISO 800. But when motion or DOF means underexposure is unavoidable, ISO 800 could have the same or higher S/N than ISO 640.

In low light maximize exposure and use the lowest possible ISO starting at ISO 800.
 
Willie901-

Thanks again for sharing this information here. I have used the X Pro 2 a bit in low light situations and, not aware of or following this guideline would always opt for the lowest higher iso I thought I'd need, calculating shutter and aperture from there. After reading your post, I went to find a recent file and quickly processed this one (from RAF); iso 800 1/60th at f5.6

44472193291_ea741a6dfa_b.jpg


If I take a small cropping and view it at 100 percent, the noise level looks pretty good to my eyes on the monitor. And there is good detail in shadow areas. Am I to understand then, and without benefit here of a comparable file taken at say 1600, that that one would be noticeably noisier? And conversely, would the image quality have suffered if I'd made my exposure at iso 400 using a tripod to keep steady at 1/30th or slower shutter speed?

Thanks in advance,
David
 
Hey, Terry.

As a confirmed XP lover, I congratulate you on your providential error. I certainly hope you like using the XP2 because it's really a great camera. Although the XP1--its predecessor--was slow and quirky in comparison, I still enjoy using it as well. Fuji does really good stuff.
 
DwF said:
Thanks again for sharing this information here. I have used the X Pro 2 a bit in low light situations and, not aware of or following this guideline would always opt for the lowest higher iso I thought I'd need, calculating shutter and aperture from there. After reading your post, I went to find a recent file and quickly processed this one (from RAF); iso 800 1/60th at f5.6
...
Click to expand...

Your exposure strategy of using the lowest practical ISO is sound. You can never go wrong by minimizing sensor underexposure when the shutter is open.

The difference is your camera has two separate ISO ranges with different properties (200-640 and 800 and above). This means now there are two different minimum ISO settings to consider – 200 in bright light and 800 in low light.

DwF said:
...
Am I to understand then, and without benefit here of a comparable file taken at say 1600, that that one would be noticeably noisier?
Click to expand...

For a raw file, if you used shutter times and apertures based on the meter, the exposure at ISO 1600 would be half of the exposure at ISO 800. The camera noise is essentially identical. But at high ISO the signal level is lower and the photon noise is greater. So the S/N would be lower at ISO 1600 only because the signal level is lower.

If you used the same shutter time and aperture at ISO 800 that you used at ISO 1600 the initial ISO 800 image raw rendering would be darker. But increasing the image brightness rendering would produce an identical result to the ISO 1600 image. Increasing ISO from ISO 800 and above does not significantly increase the noise level when the exposure remains constant!

DwF said:
And conversely, would the image quality have suffered if I'd made my exposure at iso 400 using a tripod to keep steady at 1/30th or slower shutter speed? ...
Click to expand...

I don't know. The input-referred read noise level is much higher at ISO 400 compared to ISO 800. However doubling the shutter time doubles the signal level and lowers photon noise. The read noise levels are about 2 1/2 times higher at the sensor for ISO 400 compared to ISO 800.

The advantage of dual conversion gain is realized when underexposure is unavoidable.

Once you use a tripod for a static scene underexposure is avoidable. So, the best S/N will be always be at ISO 200. The more light you record the better the perceived image quality. At ISO 200 the only limit to signal level is the sensor's full-well capacity. The conversion gain applied at ISO 200 increases full-well capacity (compared to the conversion gain at ISO 800 and above). This means the S/N will be maximized because exposure is maximized.
 
Thank you again and for taking so much time and care with your response. There is a fair bit to digest but very useful!

David
 
Have tried the suggestions re Acros and iso setting. More experimenting needed, but tomorrow is for colour shots converted in photoshop elements to black and white.
 
Welcome to the dark side. My XP2 has completely replaced my MP240 for direct view usage.

Have you found the option for a small magnified image that is available in the lower right of the OVF? I’ve found mine usually stays in MF and I use that as my focusing aid.

The three lenses I usually carry are the 14, 23/2 and 50/2. I also have a 27 and a 35/2.

It’s a very competent system.
 
Only discovered the little window today when I was browsing through the manual. :) I never read manuals from cover to cover, just as a thought occurs to me. Lots to learn
 
I had always thought that the X-Pro camera looked cool - really cool. And, having previously owned a Fuji GS645S rangefinder I knew how good the Fuji lenses could be. Combine that with my local camera shop (http://www.camera-ohnuki.com/netshop/) having a big sale on the entire line of Fuji cameras and lenses, I bought the X-Pro2 and the f2 line of lenses. It was an impulse buy, and despite the sale it was still an expensive impulse buy. As I walked out of the store I had a bad feeling in my gut that I was going to be disappointed with the camera and regret the whole thing.

After one day out shooting the X-Pro2 all feelings of buyers remorse completely disappeared and were quickly replaced with a feeling of boyish jubilation. I was walking around snapping away and had the biggest grin on my face. It’s a fun camera and the lenses are fantastic. In the past I almost always used manual focus for street photography because the auto-focus was just to darn slow to lock on target. These f2 prime lenses are so fast on auto-focus - I mean it’s like instantaneous - I was getting shots I would have never got on my other cameras.

To clarify, when I say the f2 primes I mean the XF18mm f2, XF23mm f2, XF35mm f2, and XF50mm f2.

Now, to be fair to my other cameras, I still use and thoroughly enjoy them; the X-Pro2 is just a new member of the family. A really cool looking new member of the family.

All the best,
Mike
 
Congrats on your impulse buy Mike! I bet you'll continue to enjoy the camera. It does have a learning curve but also easy to connect with knowing basics. Do post on the Post your Images Thread! :)

David
 
I don't have the 2 but a 1 with a 18mm f2 and feel the same way you do Mike
about the Fuji, I purchased last year a Canon 5d with a few lenses, I used it all
about 3 times and it sit's under the bed not used I use the Fuji more heck I don't
even think I need a full frame anymore the "C" size sensor is good enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom